IMPORTANT: JREF Forums is now the International Skeptics Forum. If you are a past member of the JREF Forums you must agree to the new terms and conditions to post, send PMs, or continue to use the forum as a member. You can view them here, or you will be presented with them when you try to make a post or PM or similar.

Your private information was removed in transferring to the new forum. If you'd like to import it please see the instructions in this thread to approve transfer.
If you are having problems accessing the Forum you can contact Darat at isforum@internationalskeptics.com, please include your username and forum email address in any email.
NOTE:** TAPATALK access is currently disabled **. This is just while we work out how to ensure people have to agree to the T&Cs before posting here via Tapatalk

Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider
registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.

Would anyone in favor of allowing the kid to wear that shirt change their mind if there were a lot of kids wearing that shirt? Like, 90% of the students wearing it?

Nope. It makes no difference. Words on a shirt are still just words on a shirt.

Next question:

Would you find it offensive if you were illiterate, or if it was in Russian and you didn't know what it meant?

My point is: It's just symbolism. As such, it is not an actual solid threat of any sort. You can't ban ideas. They will be popular or not despite any use of force. Whether people put it on the front of a t-shirt or not has absolutely nothing to do with whether they think such things or have such feelings. The important part is that you offer a more rational view... and like I've implied, it should be seen as an opportunity for discourse, rather than as some sort of enemy assault. The kid offered his honest opinion and apparently wants a discussion on the subject. Indulge him and discuss. Rational people will usually take the more rational side of the argument. A use of force is not rational, in this case. It's a misuse of authority, since the kid has done nothing more than express an opinion, and in a relatively quiet way, I might add. It's just an image on a shirt.

Don't fear mere ideas and opinions. Let them out in the open for examination. Suppressing them will have the opposite effect of what you intend. A person won't change his mind if you don't listen to his side of it and attempt to understand why he thinks the way he does.

That's sort of what we're doing here in this forum, BTW; although sometimes people resort to rather questionable methods even here.

(off topic note-to-self) My compulsive editing would be much less compulsive if I weren't so fond of ellipses when writing intuitively. I've really got to stop that (yeah, I'm a perfectionist to the point of OCD).

Freedom of speech or expression doesn't really apply to students. I mean think of the teacher-student dynamic if the student really has free speech and expression. It wouldn't work. It is a disciplinary setting and you can get punished for insubordination and being disruptive. In my school you couldn't wear anything controversial, particularly anything that implied sex or used swear words. They would probably tell this kid to change his shirt. High school isn't a place to have heated political and social debates or make such statements. The school should just nip this thing in the bud.

There's a difference between banning speech and banning speech during school. Public school officials are charged with keeping children safe and providing them an education. Anything that makes violence more likely or distracts other children to the point where it interferes with their education should be prohibited.

Absolutely agree that schools are about education. There are other types of education/knowledge that students should learn while in this environment. Specifically "life skills" which include interpersonal skills, psychological skills like coping, compromise/acceptance, embracing diversity, etc.

I believe that we can do ourselves, children & young adults a disservice by choosing the incorrect policies. I can't tell from the article whether this is primary or secondary. Obviously more and more freedom is given as students mature.

I think along the same lines as you do. If it gore, violence, or foul language, no go.

But if someone wants to wear a "I support gay marriage" or "I support straight marriage" whatever. Not a big deal. Freedom of expression is important (IMO) to middle and high school kids. A sense of individuality is good too.

Nope. It makes no difference. Words on a shirt are still just words on a shirt.

Next question:

Would you find it offensive if you were illiterate, or if it was in Russian and you didn't know what it meant?

My point is it's just symbolism... as such, it is not an actual solid threat of any sort. You can't ban ideas... they will be popular or not despite any use of force. Whether people put it on the front of a t-shirt or not has absolutely nothing to do with whether they think such things or have such feelings. The important part is that you offer a more rational view... and like I've implied, it should be seen as an opportunity for discourse, rather than as some sort of enemy assault.

I think it might be different if one student wore a shirt with an anti-gay slogan on it, and 1900 in a school of 2000 wore that shirt. It wouldn't be one bad apple, it would be a hostile environment.

You can be idealistic about "it's just words!" but words have an effect. That's why they are used. The effect should be considered. If I tell my classmates "I have a donkey in my backpack!" it has one effect, if I tell my classmates "I have a gun in my backpack!" it has another, and if I tell them "I have the cut-of eyelids of your whore mother in my backpack!" it has yet another. Should I expect the same consequences/lack of consequences from all three statements?

I think along the same lines as you do. If it gore, violence, or foul language, no go.

But if someone wants to wear a "I support gay marriage" or "I support straight marriage" whatever. Not a big deal. Freedom of expression is important (IMO) to middle and high school kids. A sense of individuality is good too.

Don't worry, Alt-F4 is female.

__________________"Structural Engineering is the art of molding materials we do not wholly understand into shapes we cannot precisely analyze so as to understand forces we cannot really assess in such a way that the community at large has no reason to suspect the extent of our own ignorance." James E Amrhein

Ban them all might be the best. I still like to think some rule about "Intent to malign some group" could be possible and ideal. I'd like to see some degree of freedom of expression, even if it's messy and imperfect and often unfair.

Although this rule apparently doesn't apply if the group is Xian whites.

ps. Judging from the results of votes taken to date on gay marriage, quite a number of people are offended by pro-gay signs, slogans, demonstrations, etc,

Of course it makes a difference. If 90% of a student body is going around wearing anti gay t shirts, it disrupts the environment of learning and should not be tolerated. Simple as that.

Apparently you didn't read the rest. You certainly didn't take it into consideration, anyway.

It's only disruptive if your agenda is way more strict than it should be. Have the needed discussion, and then it becomes easy to pointedly ignore it if it continues, because everyone has had their say on the matter -- discussion over. If you can't agree, then agree to disagree... either works just fine in defusing the matter.

Anyway, just to put the period on my point, I'm done with this subject/thread.

I agree with the sentiment that if they allow one, they have to allow the other. If the other is so offensive that they can't tolerate it, ban them both.

I wonder if cases like this make the ACLU regret doing what they do or if they can completely separate their opinions from their job. I am just imagining a bunch of lawyers sitting at an oval table and no one volunteering to take the case defending the anti-gay kid.

just as it couldn't say "Gay people *********** rock!" or " My (N-word) are the bestest ever!" lol

You're one of the more reasonable people in this thread (well, most your posts. You're being a bit flip-floppy sometimes here. lol.)

I was really wondering about the "It's just words on a shirt" and "nobody can marginalize you but you" etc people.

I think the "no around the rainbow" logo actually is very close to hate speech (the rainbow just symbolizes gay pride, not advocasy of marriage equality, per se), but weirdly, I would be fine with something that just said "I don't support gay marriage."

I would not be ok with a "no around the Christian cross" logo, either. But I also wouldn't be ok with a shirt with a quote of Leviticus 20:13.

Hmmm...

__________________The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell

I agree with you but do you get what I mean? They are all for civil rights and then they have to go and defend the rights of people who are clearly anti civil rights.

The ACLU pretty consistently defends everybody's civil rights from what I know. To an extreme. They defend everyone from NAMBLA's right to publish books, to KKK rallies, holocost denialists, to left wing extremists, etc.

Everything besides actual and immediate calls for violence is on the table for them. (And as a general rule, I agree with them, even when I hate the people they defend. The rule of law in the US is generally that everything but calls for immediate mob violence is still supposed to be legal?)

__________________The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell

Did the kid in question ever explain his views? I mean the shirt is one thing but a shirt doesn't necessarily tell you why he or she may not approve of gays (assuming that's the message the shirt's conveying).

Has the kid made a statement verbally or is the shirt all that they wish to state?

__________________"If I actually believed that Jesus was coming to end the world in 2050, I'd be preparing by stocking up on timber and nails" - PZ Myers

As far as I've read, nobody in this thread has endorsed only selectively disallowing hate speech, as far as I can tell.

Can you give me an example of what you're referring to?

The shirt itself clearly suggested that there is such a thing as "too much free speech" regarding gay rights.

Doesn't it seem ironic to you that a school responds by forcibly removing that message?

They silenced him by resorting to his methods... basically proving his point in a way. They effectively told him to shut up... which is exactly what he was suggesting to do to those he found objectionable.

I can't explain it any better than that. If you don't get it, I guess you just don't get it.

For kids especially, freedom of speech can very much be the same thing as bullying.
(The same thing can apply to adults to a lesser extent, too, but what else can you do/allow if you want a free society?)

__________________The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell

For kids especially, freedom of speech can very much be the same thing as bullying.
(The same thing can apply to adults to a lesser extent, too, but what else can you do/allow if you want a free society?)

which is why most schools (that I have experienced anyway) have either gone to uniforms or have pretty specific info about wearing shirts with divisive or controversial themes/content.

which is why most schools (that I have experienced anyway) have either gone to uniforms or have pretty specific info about wearing shirts with divisive or controversial themes/content.

Makes it easier on everybody really.

Yeah.
It is easiest, and doesn't really hamper anyone's development too much, IME. (Although I wish a ban on hate speech, period, was just the line drawn. But yeah, to some elements, just a shirt that said "Atheism - being good for goodness sake" would be -pho-interpreted as "hate speech."

Yay for debate club, I guess? Maybe that's a better venue in school for allowing kids to hash this stuff out?

__________________The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell

For kids especially, freedom of speech can very much be the same thing as bullying.
(The same thing can apply to adults to a lesser extent, too, but what else can you do/allow if you want a free society?)

It's actually better to concentrate our efforts on teaching better social skills to those being bullied than it is on forcibly stopping the bullies. Victims aren't picked at random.

Also, educating the students about bullying does a lot more than simply forcing them to stop it when observed (which does nothing when an adult isn't present -- if anything, it makes things worse). A lot of the time, the bullies thinks it's a harmless joke and that the victim is overreacting... they don't even consider themselves bullies in a most cases.

I think college and your 20's is the best place for hashing that stuff out. Being a teenager is tough enough as it is without trying to be che guevara

Hmm...

Anecdote warning: starting in 7th grade, I really found a forum (school debate club/class) for rationally laying out the reasoning behind my opinions useful. I went to a really crazycakes little Christian private school, tho. Actually, my anecdotal experience was pretty unusual in a lot of ways (living with rainbow family by 16, married by 19 and still happily married, etc.)

__________________The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell

It's not philosophy... it's social psychology. I could look up some references to give you if you'd like. I just assumed it was common knowledge, particularly considering I'm not a psychologist and have heard and read it over and over and over again from various sources... including with regards to my own problems of being bullied in High School (admittedly, that was over 20 years ago).

Of course, I had the advantage of being in a small enough school as to not get lost in the shuffle (graduating class of 16). With bigger class sizes, different tactics may be more necessary than I think... but I do know that an authority figure simply silencing the bully when observed does nothing to actually help the matter. It actually tends to make things worse.